TR Forums

I went ahead and switched to it since there was nothing to lose really. After i installed Fiesty Fawn i found myself getting it ready for what amounted to well over 10 hours in the first few days, and was still working on compiz alone for an equal amount of time. After installing Gutsy Gibbon i've found myself saying "Now what am i supposed to do" everything simply works. No more of the having to dig up your own codecs because they are "Restricted" it just asks you if you want to install the restricted codec to play your file, as if to make you feel guilty, but then willingly sumbits. The dual monitor, and much better display setup is great. it gave me a bug on the "test" option, but worked fine in the actually change of the desktop size. Fiesty Fawn was at the point where it was "Yea it's easier but not enough for average users yet." So far its looking like Gutsy Gibbon is going to be a much better candidate for becoming a real replacement, and not to take another of the billions of shots at Vista, but for a beta, i don't find myself waiting for the full release either. That puts this beta more completed than Vista's current state... Anyone else gonna give it a shot?

Once the full thing is out (17 days) I'll upgrade my local ubuntu server.

I'm currently debating whether to install Vista or try this out. I tried Feisty Fawn a while back, but frustration got the best of me with bugs & the like. Let me know how your experience works out.

Btw, so dual screens are supported out of the box now?

Nitrodist: Dual screens should be more stable and are easier to set up with most being out-of-the-box, according to the release notes.

I also have the beta and apart from a display issue (with ATI having closed drivers, not Ubuntu's fault) which I quickly fixed it's better than Vista despite being a beta.

It feels much more responsive than Vista (even though I have a good computer), looks better (Compiz), and runs my supposedly Vista-compatible games stabler and faster than Vista does (Wine).

Game_boy wrote:

Nitrodist: Dual screens should be more stable and are easier to set up with most being out-of-the-box, according to the release notes.

I also have the beta and apart from a display issue (with ATI having closed drivers, not Ubuntu's fault) which I quickly fixed it's better than Vista despite being a beta.

It feels much more responsive than Vista (even though I have a good computer), looks better (Compiz), and runs my supposedly Vista-compatible games stabler and faster than Vista does (Wine).

Um, BS, http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/amd ... /page3.asp

Unless wine is faster than xp

Their test rig had 2gb ram, if he only had 1 that difference could very well be there

I tried it, but was repelled immediately, as I have been by most versions since 6.x, by the inability of Ubuntu to correctly detect my monitor and allow me to change my screen resolution. This is seriously annoying. To add to that, they have almost every monitor model BUT mine. Mine is a ViewSonic E70F (old, and dying CRT), and they have listed E70-1 to about E70-8 and then E70F+ and E70F+b and all sorts, and whenver I try to change to any of these the monitor application thingy just crashes, not even allowing a test or anything. Gaaaah

Plinth wrote:

I tried it, but was repelled immediately, as I have been by most versions since 6.x, by the inability of Ubuntu to correctly detect my monitor and allow me to change my screen resolution. This is seriously annoying. To add to that, they have almost every monitor model BUT mine. Mine is a ViewSonic E70F (old, and dying CRT), and they have listed E70-1 to about E70-8 and then E70F+ and E70F+b and all sorts, and whenver I try to change to any of these the monitor application thingy just crashes, not even allowing a test or anything. Gaaaah

use generic monitor with your resolutions, as long as you know your refresh rates you won't have any problems...

*edit* anyone that uses linux has many more problems than that, and honestly, i'm pretty sure you have more problems with windows than this problem which could have been solved by just a quick mod on your xorg.conf file...

Heiwashin wrote:

Plinth wrote:

I tried it, but was repelled immediately, as I have been by most versions since 6.x, by the inability of Ubuntu to correctly detect my monitor and allow me to change my screen resolution. This is seriously annoying. To add to that, they have almost every monitor model BUT mine. Mine is a ViewSonic E70F (old, and dying CRT), and they have listed E70-1 to about E70-8 and then E70F+ and E70F+b and all sorts, and whenver I try to change to any of these the monitor application thingy just crashes, not even allowing a test or anything. Gaaaah

use generic monitor with your resolutions, as long as you know your refresh rates you won't have any problems...

*edit* anyone that uses linux has many more problems than that, and honestly, i'm pretty sure you have more problems with windows than this problem which could have been solved by just a quick mod on your xorg.conf file...

I think that the point here is that it should work out of the box. According to their page about the Desktop Edition, "Ubuntu 'Just Works'". This is an example of Ubuntu not working. I've had similar issues getting it to install certain software. Maybe this release will fix some of that. I'm also going to try PCLinuxOS and see how that works out for me. Normally, I'm a Gentoo fan, but sometimes I'd like the thing to just work with all the pretties.

titan wrote:

Heiwashin wrote:

Plinth wrote:

I tried it, but was repelled immediately, as I have been by most versions since 6.x, by the inability of Ubuntu to correctly detect my monitor and allow me to change my screen resolution. This is seriously annoying. To add to that, they have almost every monitor model BUT mine. Mine is a ViewSonic E70F (old, and dying CRT), and they have listed E70-1 to about E70-8 and then E70F+ and E70F+b and all sorts, and whenver I try to change to any of these the monitor application thingy just crashes, not even allowing a test or anything. Gaaaah

use generic monitor with your resolutions, as long as you know your refresh rates you won't have any problems...

*edit* anyone that uses linux has many more problems than that, and honestly, i'm pretty sure you have more problems with windows than this problem which could have been solved by just a quick mod on your xorg.conf file...

I think that the point here is that it should work out of the box. According to their page about the Desktop Edition, "Ubuntu 'Just Works'". This is an example of Ubuntu not working. I've had similar issues getting it to install certain software. Maybe this release will fix some of that. I'm also going to try PCLinuxOS and see how that works out for me. Normally, I'm a Gentoo fan, but sometimes I'd like the thing to just work with all the pretties.

EXACTLY. I don't want to edit any file, or anything like that. I just want it to work. No text editor, just a simple thing that detects what I have and I can set it to, like right click properties on the desktop -> settings -> set the resolution or dual screen setup.

Nitrodist wrote:

titan wrote:

Heiwashin wrote:

Plinth wrote:

I tried it, but was repelled immediately, as I have been by most versions since 6.x, by the inability of Ubuntu to correctly detect my monitor and allow me to change my screen resolution. This is seriously annoying. To add to that, they have almost every monitor model BUT mine. Mine is a ViewSonic E70F (old, and dying CRT), and they have listed E70-1 to about E70-8 and then E70F+ and E70F+b and all sorts, and whenver I try to change to any of these the monitor application thingy just crashes, not even allowing a test or anything. Gaaaah

use generic monitor with your resolutions, as long as you know your refresh rates you won't have any problems...

*edit* anyone that uses linux has many more problems than that, and honestly, i'm pretty sure you have more problems with windows than this problem which could have been solved by just a quick mod on your xorg.conf file...

I think that the point here is that it should work out of the box. According to their page about the Desktop Edition, "Ubuntu 'Just Works'". This is an example of Ubuntu not working. I've had similar issues getting it to install certain software. Maybe this release will fix some of that. I'm also going to try PCLinuxOS and see how that works out for me. Normally, I'm a Gentoo fan, but sometimes I'd like the thing to just work with all the pretties.

EXACTLY. I don't want to edit any file, or anything like that. I just want it to work. No text editor, just a simple thing that detects what I have and I can set it to, like right click properties on the desktop -> settings -> set the resolution or dual screen setup.

I certainly can't argue the resolution change or dual display issue, however your monitor problem strikes me as a specious argument. I just checked my Windows system and it doesn't support a ViewSonic E70F without a driver from ViewSonic. Of course I have no clue what it would do if I tried to use it anyway, since I don't have one. Still, all the info needed to make Ubuntu properly handle your monitor is right there on the page describing it. You don't even need to use an editor.

I won't argue that the Linux desktop is ready for the general populace to use. It's not that it is missing any important features or is terribly that much harder to use than Windows. It is just very different. When it acts like Windows and looks like Windows the great masses will use it, at which point it will be Windows.

Back on topic, I'll have to go pull down the latest beta and see how it looks. It sounds like they have fixed some of the annoyances I hit, mainly surrounding dual screen setups.

--SS

I'l agree with the whole work out of the box thing, but personally i've always looked at linux distro's as being the ehting that yhou can fix yourself and have working once it's fixed almsot indefintely unless you break it. Windows breaks itself if you leave it alone long enough which is pretty sad imo. just a thought though

Yeah, refresh rates are really annoying when dealing with linux as there's no easy way to change them (and my dad isn't big on editing xorg.conf files)

It's getting better, under Ubuntu it's just System->Preferences->Screen Resolution
I'll admit that it only works if everything is autodetected correctly, but then the same is true for Windows and the autodetection is getting better all the time.

thecoldanddarkone wrote:

Game_boy wrote:

Nitrodist: Dual screens should be more stable and are easier to set up with most being out-of-the-box, according to the release notes.

I also have the beta and apart from a display issue (with ATI having closed drivers, not Ubuntu's fault) which I quickly fixed it's better than Vista despite being a beta.

It feels much more responsive than Vista (even though I have a good computer), looks better (Compiz), and runs my supposedly Vista-compatible games stabler and faster than Vista does (Wine).

Um, BS, http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/amd ... /page3.asp

Unless wine is faster than xp

...but you've never heard of the game I play (Blockland), so you can't say that. I didn't say every game ran faster.

notfred wrote:

It's getting better, under Ubuntu it's just System->Preferences->Screen Resolution
I'll admit that it only works if everything is autodetected correctly, but then the same is true for Windows and the autodetection is getting better all the time.

now they have a new option, system>administration>screens and graphics. This is the new thing they seem to be so jolly about. Even if it fails, you can pick a generic monitor to your specs, not a bad alternative(that's also the new dual screen manager)

Usacomp2k3 wrote:

Yeah, refresh rates are really annoying when dealing with linux as there's no easy way to change them (and my dad isn't big on editing xorg.conf files)

From my experience, the refresh rate has always been set to the highest compatible rate. Environments might be a bit different from the window managers that I've used though.

titan wrote:

Usacomp2k3 wrote:

Yeah, refresh rates are really annoying when dealing with linux as there's no easy way to change them (and my dad isn't big on editing xorg.conf files)

From my experience, the refresh rate has always been set to the highest compatible rate. Environments might be a bit different from the window managers that I've used though.

Yea i was gonna say that, but i wasn't positive so i left it alone, but yea, my screen has a max refresh of 58hz on 1280x800 and it auto sets that if i pick max resolution, even in the generic lcd 1280x800 setting.

Heiwashin wrote:

titan wrote:

Usacomp2k3 wrote:

Yeah, refresh rates are really annoying when dealing with linux as there's no easy way to change them (and my dad isn't big on editing xorg.conf files)

From my experience, the refresh rate has always been set to the highest compatible rate. Environments might be a bit different from the window managers that I've used though.

Yea i was gonna say that, but i wasn't positive so i left it alone, but yea, my screen has a max refresh of 58hz on 1280x800 and it auto sets that if i pick max resolution, even in the generic lcd 1280x800 setting.

For an LCD it's not that big of a deal. However the monitor in question is a CRT, and even when I set the resolution to 1024x768, 60hz was still the only option. Probably has something to do with me completely redoing the video cable of that monitor though. I'm sure it no longer passes those bits that tell it the compatible range. It's just much easier in Windows to uncheck the "hide options this display cannon support" option in such cases.

EDIT: clarifications.

Usacomp2k3 wrote:

Heiwashin wrote:

titan wrote:

Usacomp2k3 wrote:

Yeah, refresh rates are really annoying when dealing with linux as there's no easy way to change them (and my dad isn't big on editing xorg.conf files)

From my experience, the refresh rate has always been set to the highest compatible rate. Environments might be a bit different from the window managers that I've used though.

Yea i was gonna say that, but i wasn't positive so i left it alone, but yea, my screen has a max refresh of 58hz on 1280x800 and it auto sets that if i pick max resolution, even in the generic lcd 1280x800 setting.

For an LCD it's not that big of a deal, but even when I set the resolution of the 19" on that machine to 1024x768, 60hz was still the only option. Probably has something to do with me completely redoing the video cable of that monitor though. I'm sure it no longer passes those bits that tell it the compatible range. It's just much easier in Windows to uncheck the "hide options this display cannon support" option in such cases.

I don't know how it works for an LCD in Linux, but with a CRT you have to enter a signal range -- I don't know if that's the right term -- and from that Linux is able to determine compatible refresh rates. At least, that's my understanding.

is xubuntu going to get a similar improvement for dealing with dual monitors?

BobbinThreadbare wrote:

is xubuntu going to get a similar improvement for dealing with dual monitors?

Supposed too,the beta for that is out already too

I just upgraded to 7.10 some cool new stuff but i have only been using it for a few minutes at this point. i am running it on my old gateway laptop now i just need to try 7.10 on my dell laptop to see if the POS dell wireless card will work with it.

I think I'll skip testing this version all together, unless the Kubuntu team decides to release it with KDE4 after all.

I'm still running Feisty Fawn until the official release date.
My son just loaded Gutsy onto his PS-3 replacing YD.

It's been a few years since I actually installed a desktop linux distro outside of VMWare. Nice to see that in the meantime, X *still* can't pull up the Gord-damn refresh rates off VESA. For crying out loud, even Windows 95 could do that!

I not-so-fondly remember never having my CRTs set up correctly because no matter how much I fiddled with the refresh rates, they never were 100% correct.

Ok i have a bitch about Gutsy. The new desktop switcher thingy that changes between desktop one and two wants to change every time i touch the side of my touch pad where the scroll part is. I gotta find a way to kill it.

Well, I lost my patience, to upgrade server
is the correct way, right?

Hance wrote:

Ok i have a bitch about Gutsy. The new desktop switcher thingy that changes between desktop one and two wants to change every time i touch the side of my touch pad where the scroll part is. I gotta find a way to kill it.

I think that may be more the touchpad rather than the desktop switcher, try googling for "Synaptics touchpad linux" or similar. If you get the right driver installed it has a lot of funky controls for things like that.

I was able to find the driver for my laptop for when I had 6.10 on it (I think that's which one it was at least).
Just ran this on my server..7.04